September 2016
Volume 57, Issue 12
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2016
Discomfort over Time Associated with various Ocular Demodex Treatment Products
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • William Ngo
    University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
  • Lyndon William Jones
    University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
  • Sruthi Srinivasan
    University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
  • Etty Bitton
    University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   William Ngo, American Optometric Foundation (R); Lyndon Jones, Advanced Vision Research (F); Sruthi Srinivasan, None; Etty Bitton, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  Canadian Optometric Education Trust Fund
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science September 2016, Vol.57, 2838. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to Subscribers Only
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      William Ngo, Lyndon William Jones, Sruthi Srinivasan, Etty Bitton; Discomfort over Time Associated with various Ocular Demodex Treatment Products. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2016;57(12):2838.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To quantify discomfort over time of various eyelid hygiene products intended for ocular Demodex treatment.

Methods : This was a prospective randomized crossover open label study that enrolled 26 healthy participants. The test products used in this study were OCuSOFT Plus (OP), NovaBay Avenova (NA), OCuSOFT OUST Demodex Swabstix (ODS), Bio-Tissue Cliradex (CD), TheraTears TheraLid (TT), and Bausch+Lomb Sensitive Eyes Plus Saline was used as control. Participants were asked to close their eyes as the product was gently rubbed (10 cycles of gentle nasal to temporal rubbing) into the eyelid margins. Subjective discomfort was rated on a scale of 0 to 10 (0=no discomfort, 10=maximal discomfort). Discomfort ratings were obtained prior to product application, every 15 seconds after product application for 5 minutes, and then every 30 seconds for another 5 minutes, for a total duration of 10 minutes. Order of product use was randomized, and time between each product use (washout) was no less than 48 hours.

Results : Twenty five participants (mean age=26±6yrs, 11M) completed the study. There was no significant difference in discomfort between all products at pre-application. The discomfort of both NA and OP were not significantly different than saline (p>0.05) at all time points. Discomfort (mean±SD) of CD was significantly different than saline (p<0.05) between 0 and 180s inclusive, peaking at 45s (discomfort=4.0±2.8). Discomfort of TT was significantly different than saline (p<0.05) between 15s and 135s inclusive, peaking at 90s (discomfort=1.3±1.6). Discomfort of ODS increased steadily and became significantly different than saline (p<0.05) at 30s, peaking at 300s (discomfort=5.6±3.1), and remained elevated until the product was cleaned off the eyelids at 600s. A summary of discomfort experienced over time is presented in Figure 1.

Conclusions : Of the products available for ocular Demodex treatment, ODS, TT, and CD all induced significant levels of discomfort. The results from this study may help practitioners better educate their patients about potential discomfort that may arise from using certain products intended for ocular Demodex management.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2016 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, Wash., May 1-5, 2016.

 

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×